InfluenceMap’s analysis of responses to the Future Gas Strategy consultation finds that companies and industry associations from the fossil fuel value chain in Australia have pushed back heavily on any attempt to reference reducing fossil gas demand in Australia’s Future Gas Strategy, all while strongly advocating for new fossil gas supply and investments. Of the 34 companies and industry associations included in the analysis, 26 (76%) advocated for positions that are misaligned with IPCC guidance on the global use of gas in 1.5°C decarbonization pathways. In contrast, only 3 (9%) companies and associations advocated in a manner that is aligned with Science-Based Policy.
-
Multiple entities from the oil and gas industry used their response to advocate for fossil fuels to be included in the Capacity Investment Scheme, which would give fossil fuel companies access to finance intended for renewables. The Australian Energy Council, the Australian Pipelines and Gas Association, Origin Energy and Woodside Energy each advocated for the Capacity Investment Scheme to expand to include fossil fuels, while the Australian Energy Producers advocated for Australian energy and climate policy to be “technology neutral”, and APA Group called on similar policy to be introduced that incentivizes fossil fuel use. Opening up the Capacity Investment Scheme to fossil fuel projects would allow such projects to be supported through a government policy that aims to “provide(s) a national framework to encourage new investment in renewable capacity, such as wind and solar, as well as clean dispatchable capacity, such as battery storage.”
-
The oil and gas industry pushed back on the consultation paper’s acknowledgement that a reduction in fossil gas demand would support the decarbonization of the Australian economy and that excess supply should be avoided. Woodside advocated for the Strategy to outline that it is “not going to artificially seek to curtail supply in an attempt to reduce demand”. Chevron similarly recommended against the objective that fossil gas supply should not be in excess, emphasizing potential consequences of high energy prices and energy shortages. INPEX, Senex and the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia advocated similar positions, with Senex stating that the government’s approach of ensuring sufficient - but not excessive - supply of gas is “fundamentally flawed”.
-
Many oil and gas interests advocated for the strategy to promote new supply and investments in fossil gas, stressing that new gas supply is needed to avoid domestic gas shortages, while simultaneously promoting continued or increased fossil gas exports. 22 companies and industry associations advocated for the Future Gas Strategy to prioritize or facilitate new investment and supply in fossil gas, including BP, Origin Energy, Woodside Energy and Chevron. Of these 22 entities, 14 also stressed the need for the strategy to support Australia’s fossil fuel exports, including the Asia Natural Gas and Energy Association (ANGEA), Business Council of Australia, Santos and INPEX. Three entities - the Australian Energy Producers, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and BlueScope Steel - advocated for the removal of state moratoriums on fossil fuel exploration and production.
-
The consultation responses reveal a lack of positive engagement from other areas of the economy that claim to support the Paris Agreement and Australia’s net zero by 2050 target. Of the 34 respondents covered by InfluenceMap’s database, 30 (88%) came from the energy, metals and mining, and utilities sectors. In contrast, entities from other sectors of the economy included in InfluenceMap’s database, such as financials, consumer staples and transportation companies, did not appear to transparently engage with the consultation. These findings point to the continuation of a trend identified in InfluenceMap’s January 2024 Australia analysis, which found that a significant majority of Australia’s leading companies and industry associations across a broad array of sectors are failing to follow through on their supportive top-line climate messaging with active advocacy for climate policy.
-
Only three respondents, Fortescue Future Industries, the Clean Energy Council and the Energy Efficiency Council, appeared to use their submission to advocate for Science-Based Policy. These entities were assessed as aligned with IPCC advice on delivering 1.5°C warming. Fortescue Future Industries called for the Future Gas Strategy to support a decline in gas usage that aligns with Australia's climate targets, while also advocating for policy to aid the development of green hydrogen. The Clean Energy Council called for the Strategy to plan for the systematic phasing out of fossil-fuel gas extraction, consumption and exports and to support the full decarbonization of Australia’s gas sector in alignment with the country's 2030 and 2050 emissions targets. The Energy Efficiency Council likewise advocated for the Australian Government to use the Future Gas Strategy as a vehicle to begin planning Australia's transition away from fossil gas and as a guide to assist emerging nations in transitioning away from a reliance on gas.
-
While AGL and EnergyAustralia promoted policy measures to reduce Australia’s reliance on fossil gas, these entities also advocated for continued fossil gas investment and supply. For example, AGL supported restrictions banning gas connections to new residential buildings, and supported improved energy efficiency standards for new and existing buildings, yet it also appeared to call for continued gas supply to meet demand. EnergyAustralia also suggested the Strategy provide a clear policy commitment across all levels of government that “electrification is the most effective means to decarbonize energy and adjacent sectors”, but simultaneously advocated for “significant investment” in new fossil gas supply in its submission.
- The analysis also found that several recurring and misleading narratives were used by entities advocating for a continued role for fossil gas. These narratives were assessed as not aligned with key findings from the IPCC, as well as with a number of other authoriatative bodies. See InfluenceMap's February 2024 Briefing on Australia's Gas Strategy here for a detailed fact checking analysis of these narratives.
